Sid: T. Denny lost interest in contributing to U athletics, still has contact w/ Kill

[Section2]

If being a liberal means I don't give out desperate handjobs for spare change to rich oligarchs, then yes I suppose I'm a liberal.

If the only reason he was contributing money was to garner favor for his own business deals, *&^!#*&^!#*&^!#*&^!# him.

Oh goooood for yooouuuu. You're so high minded and morally superior. Rich oligarchs! Pocket change! Metaphorical handjobs! God I admire you.

 

[Dr.Don]

Oh goooood for yooouuuu. You're so high minded and morally superior. Rich oligarchs! Pocket change! Metaphorical handjobs! God I admire you.

2, I have trouble understanding why you turn everyone's comments into personal and political junctures. Sorry man.

 

[Killjoy]

T. Denny does not own Sanford Health. He is not an officer of Sanford Health. Sanford Health is a not-for-profit healthcare system. T. Denny does not profit from the dealings of Sanford Health and did not stand to gain financially from the merger of Fairview University and Sanford Health. T. Denny has made something like $700 million in donations to what was formerly known as Sioux Valley Health beginning with $16 million for a children's hospital and followed by $400 million to catapult Sanford into a major player in medical research. T. Denny was in no way a part of the business relationship between Sanford Health and Fairview and the Collective Sid should more carefully report the relationship.

Thank you! Unbelievable how ill informed people have been about this. There was a lot more going on here than most people realize, including the use of misinformation. That wasn't by accident.

 

[Gopherube]

Yes, I am still waiting to see IF our Norwood is capable of raising money for the U of M Athletic Department Revenue Sports "Big three..." revenue generators. He has been here over two years and the results to date are more than slightly underwhelming. He has managed to bring in lots of assistants from VCU...maybe that can put him over the top with his fund-raising efforts...I would LOVE to see him do something big in the fund-raising area of his job...but...will have to see it before I will believe it. I'm kind of old-fashioned that way. I have to see the ground breaking ceremonies take place before I believe anything of consequence is really happening behind the scenes... Seeing IS believing.
; 0 )

Teague has been here slightly over ONE year my friend. He went to work June 18, 2012. Embellishing facts normally works against people tring to "sell" a point.

 

[Deleted_User]

Same here.

I just saw a formation of flying pigs moving through Northfield and heading north. No Ferentz sighted.

 

[Section2]

2, I have trouble understanding why you turn everyone's comments into personal and political junctures. Sorry man.

His post WAS political, my post was apolitical.

I don't hate people for committing the crime of being successful. And I don't feel that I or the U are owed anything by anyone. I think it's too bad that our most generous donor is choosing not to this time. I don't think it's a good time to hop up on your soapbox and rant. It's not a good thing in the midst of a huge donation drive.

 

[bemidjigopher]

Well said section 2, nothing wrong with making money. It's not like T. Denny was doing anything illegal, so what if he wanted something in return, guess what most sponsors do, and most boosters are like sponsors, most of them want something in return for their millions of dollars.

 

[Gopher Warrior]

T. Denny does not profit from the dealings of Sanford Health and did not stand to gain financially from the merger of Fairview University and Sanford Health.

That's untrue. Sanford Health does a good amount of business with Denny's companies. You can debate whether all dealings are at an arm's length, but the bigger Sanford Health grows, the better for Denny.

At any rate, more important is that the U's $190MM "campaign" is nonsensical and a realistic approach is needed to get some priority items done.

 

[imthewalrus]

A Wren post that I agree with? I'm checking outside to see if there are any flying pigs right now.

It is not kosher for you to pass false rumors of flying pigs OR for you to try to be "cute" as you try to dis your fellow Golden Gopher Football Fan.

Still: it is good to know that you are a faithful reader of my contrast material.

Bless you Jeshurun...and: so it goes...

; 0 )

 

[imthewalrus]

I just saw a formation of flying pigs moving through Northfield and heading north. No Ferentz sighted.

Dean, Dean, Dean...I am afraid that your playful little friends Jeshurun and station 19 have been reading contrasting points of view and are afraid to tell their moms what they have really learned today. They are such children. IF you think pigs can fly: "...here's mud in your eye..."

Your little friends Jeshurun and station 19 are just acting out...again.

; 0 )

 

[everybody knows my name]

Isn't it borderline illegal? That is on the border of breaking a pay to play law.

I don't see what law Sanford could have broken by not donating any money.

Do we need to have a law that says people must donate money to prove that there's no quid pro quo?

 

[goldengophers]

Both T.Denny and Sanford Health weren't looking to expand to the Twin Cities out of the goodness of their hearts. There were substantial sums of money that both were after. The only way Fairview and the UMMC should be sold is if it is to Mayo not some podunk pay-for-play scheme for the benefit of athletics.

 

[Pewterschmidt]

Y'all understand that Sanford doesn't own Sanford Health, right? He has little to no stake in that healthcare org other than his name.

 

[Pewterschmidt]

That's untrue. Sanford Health does a good amount of business with Denny's companies. You can debate whether all dealings are at an arm's length, but the bigger Sanford Health grows, the better for Denny.

At any rate, more important is that the U's $190MM "campaign" is nonsensical and a realistic approach is needed to get some priority items done.

That's stretching it a bit. Sioux Valley/Sanford was a client of mine during their transition and I know quite a bit about the donation, name change, and the relationship between the 2. It's like saying what's good for 3M is good for Famous Dave's. There's a very indirect relationship.

T Denny is all about his legacy at this point. That trumps all else. He wants to grow Sanford Health to stroke his ego and grow his legacy, not his bank account.

 

[goldengophers]

Y'all understand that Sanford doesn't own Sanford Health, right? He has little to no stake in that healthcare org other than his name.

Obviously not true or he wouldn't have pulled back on his donations to the U after the deal fell apart. They are one in the same.

 

[Gopherdrummer]

For what it is worth, T. Denny was not listed on last years Forbes list of richest people and many articles have estimated his net worth to be around $400-$500 Million today. Yes, this is a lot of money. But for someone who wants to give away his money to charities and other philanthropy activities, it is possible that he isn't really chomping at the bit to donate to the U's AD right now.

He is no where near the "sugar daddy" that Phil Knight is for Oregon. As mentioned earlier, the U has hundreds of thousands of alums. Many of whom have been very successful in the business world. Some are even CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. It is about time that the administration engaged more with the wider alumni base instead of focusing on a single individual. Perhaps they are. T. Denny has become more of a buzzword in the media. Everyone thinks it all rests on his shoulders. If so, that is a terrible way to raise funds since neither he, nor his fortune, will be around forever.

I am confident in Teague's abilities until proven otherwise. With the way he presents himself, it seems like he gets that College athletics has unfortunately become more of a business. Something that Maturi failed to comprehend.

 

[Gopherguy0723]

Obviously not true or he wouldn't have pulled back on his donations to the U after the deal fell apart. They are one in the same.

Exactly. Whether it was for money, ego, or something else, Mr. Sanford expected the deal to go through. His "donation" was supposed to seal the deal.

What does it say about Kaler that they would go through with such a deal? I have no trust in him at all.

 

[Gopher Warrior]

That's stretching it a bit. Sioux Valley/Sanford was a client of mine during their transition and I know quite a bit about the donation, name change, and the relationship between the 2. It's like saying what's good for 3M is good for Famous Dave's. There's a very indirect relationship.

I disagree. Denny's companies profit thanks to the relationship, especially in the area of financial services. In addition there have been specific transactions (real estate, for example) between the parties, not to mention a related party being added to Sanford Health as a 'SVP / Strategic Advisor'.

Very direct relationships. Not saying it's good, bad or otherwise. However, they most certainly exist.

 

[RodentRampage]

Exactly. Whether it was for money, ego, or something else, Mr. Sanford expected the deal to go through. His "donation" was supposed to seal the deal.

What does it say about Kaler that they would go through with such a deal? I have no trust in him at all.

On the contrary, I think it says quite a lot. The medical department didn't think this was a good deal, and Kaler didn't force it through over their objections.

 

[Gopherprof]

His post WAS political, my post was apolitical.

Not really. The OP said something about "liberals" and the usual rant that happens way too often on here. I personally don't look at this as a liberal/conservative issue. Being against pay-for-play when it comes to public institutions is really just common sense. The only reason it may be a political issue is because there are apparently some people foolish enough to believe that it's a good thing that people can give bribes for political and financial favors.

Again, this isn't, or shouldn't be, a soap box issue. It's common sense. Then again maybe even that is politicized nowadays.

 

[Gopherguy0723]

On the contrary, I think it says quite a lot. The medical department didn't think this was a good deal, and Kaler didn't force it through over their objections.

Didn't it fall through because the state slammed the door on it? For it to come as far as it did, wouldn't Kaler have had to give some type of consent until it became politically toxic?

 

[Section2]

Not really. The OP said something about "liberals" and the usual rant that happens way too often on here. I personally don't look at this as a liberal/conservative issue. Being against pay-for-play when it comes to public institutions is really just common sense. The only reason it may be a political issue is because there are apparently some people foolish enough to believe that it's a good thing that people can give bribes for political and financial favors.

Again, this isn't, or shouldn't be, a soap box issue. It's common sense. Then again maybe even that is politicized nowadays.

I don't see the ethical dilemma you do. If the U had two business choices, and one curried favor with an important donor, then you just include that in the assessment. If Sanford was far worse, then it's an easy decision. If they are the similar, the choice is also easy.
But don't act so innocent prof. You went on a rant against Sanford simply because of his success and wealth and that's what drew my response. And you really are assuming all of the pay for play anyway. How do you know? You have no clue, but you sure do have a lot of envy for those with wealth.

 

[Gopherprof]

You went on a rant against Sanford simply because of his success and wealth and that's what drew my response.

Absolutely not. What I object to is him thinking he can use his wealth for his own personal benefit against the public interest. That's why bribes are illegal, and a donation with an expected kickback is just a bribe by a different name.

You're the one implying political bias (or something) here. I was also very much against the Vikings stadium deal for largely the same reasons, and that was passed mostly with the support of the major Dem politicians in the state. When it comes to money in politics everyone is guilty, and your indifference is part of the problem.

Also, this:

If the U had two business choices, and one curried favor with an important donor, then you just include that in the assessment. If Sanford was far worse, then it's an easy decision. If they are the similar, the choice is also easy.

is painfully naive. The reason why you give a bribe is because everything isn't equal. It's a way of buying support for something that otherwise wouldn't be popular or logical.

 

[Section2]

Absolutely not. What I object to is him thinking he can use his wealth for his own personal benefit against the public interest. That's why bribes are illegal, and a donation with an expected kickback is just a bribe by a different name.

You're the one implying political bias (or something) here. I was also very much against the Vikings stadium deal for largely the same reasons, and that was passed mostly with the support of the major Dem politicians in the state. When it comes to money in politics everyone is guilty, and your indifference is part of the problem.

Also, this:

is painfully naive. The reason why you give a bribe is because everything isn't equal. It's a way of buying support for something that otherwise wouldn't be popular or logical.

You are assuming a great deal about this situation, and comparing it to the Vikings? How is that similar? That was hundreds of millions of tax dollars. What tax money is used here?
I'm naive? That's the way the world works prof, not in the idealized halls you roam apparently. I never said everything was equal. What I said was that if you're considering two proposals, and they're close, then the fact that one is a major donor would be the tie breaker. He's already given considerable sums of money. What did he get for it? Since he only donates money as bribes.

But he's an oligarch! He's controlling our society and our lives! How dare that rich jerk! I should be making hundreds of millions, I'm a professor!

 

[Gopherprof]

You are assuming a great deal about this situation

Anyone with two connected brain cells could figure this out.

and comparing it to the Vikings? How is that similar? That was hundreds of millions of tax dollars. What tax money is used here?

Because both are examples of power and influence working against the public interest, or at least keeping the public out of the debate. My God, if Wren can realize why this deal was bad for the public/university.....

I'm naive?

Perhaps not naive, but you're certainly trying to have it both ways by assuming that maybe this wasn't a bribe but at the same time saying "that's the way the world works". Which one is it?

That's the way the world works prof, not in the idealized halls you roam apparently.

That's the way the world works when not enough people give a damn to protect the public interest from those that would try to corrupt it. Also, I don't roam in halls, that would be weird. And most of them are poorly painted.

He's already given considerable sums of money. What did he get for it?

What is he supposed to get for it?

But he's an oligarch! He's controlling our society and our lives!

Well we agree on this.

I should be making hundreds of millions, I'm a professor!

If you could find anywhere in which I made this personally about me, go for it. Taking personal jabs is the hallmark of a losing argument.

 

[Killjoy]

Absolutely not. What I object to is him thinking he can use his wealth for his own personal benefit against the public interest. That's why bribes are illegal, and a donation with an expected kickback is just a bribe by a different name.

How did you come to this conclusion?

Sanford, like Fairview are both non-profit health care organizations. Sanford Health Care was named that because of the money Denny he donated to the hospital. He has no financial interest or ownership in the system.

The true story is that these two non-profit institutions were having exploratory talks when University along with the university doctors decided that they wanted have nothing to do with the Sanford Healthcare System. They thus used their political might along with incorrect information to quash these beginning discussions. The real reality is that Fairview invested spent millions to turn the hospital around and make it profitable. The University of Minnesota along with the state legislature should have thanked Fairview saving the hospital but instead they tried to make Fairview look like the bad guys. Lorie Swanson played her part well. We will never know what would have come out of those discussions since Fairview withdrew from the discussions after they realized that there were too many agendas out there. This included the U using this as an opportunity to take back the hospital from Fairview after they invested millions of dollars and expertise to turn it around.

Denny Sanford role in this was nothing more than a red herring in a high stake poker game of political motivated people. It was great theater but as a result most people are very misinformed about Denny Sanford's role and what really took place and why.

 

[Section2]

Anyone with two connected brain cells could figure this out.


Because both are examples of power and influence working against the public interest, or at least keeping the public out of the debate. My God, if Wren can realize why this deal was bad for the public/university.....


Perhaps not naive, but you're certainly trying to have it both ways by assuming that maybe this wasn't a bribe but at the same time saying "that's the way the world works". Which one is it?


That's the way the world works when not enough people give a damn to protect the public interest from those that would try to corrupt it. Also, I don't roam in halls, that would be weird. And most of them are poorly painted.


What is he supposed to get for it?


Well we agree on this.


If you could find anywhere in which I made this personally about me, go for it. Taking personal jabs is the hallmark of a losing argument.

1. Figure it out? Or make a reasonable assumption. You haven't figured anything out unless you have more info. I don't think t Denny has been giving money to the U to set up this one deal. I think he gives money to the U because he's wealthy and passionate about it. For your assumption to be true, he would have to know that Sanford was the worse option for the U, but thought floating a possible donation could swing the deal. That's the only possibility in my mind that makes him a villain. I object to your vile characterization of someone you don't know, regarding a situation you know little about. A generous successful alum is worthy of the benefit of the doubt.
2. You will have to explain to me what this has to do with the public interest. How does this affect me? The Vikings stadium takes money out of my wallet.
3. You can't "assume" that maybe it wasn't a bribe. That's not an assumption. That's holding it as a possibility. You are the one doing the assuming. And even if you're right, you're naive to think this isn't the way the world works in government, business, etc.
4. I don't really know what the public interest is. Hard to comment. But our whole country is corrupt.
5. You are accusing him of being a purely evil quid pro quo anti public interest oligarch. So please, tell me what he got in return for his past giving?
6. Oh yes. When I think of the people controlling my life, I think of a South Dakota millionaire first and foremost.
7. It's my attempt to summarize your personal emotional response to a rich guy. I'm making some assumptions, but what's good for the goose...

 

[Gopherprof]

How did you come to this conclusion?

Because he has held his donation prowess over the university to get what he wants?

Sanford, like Fairview is a non-profit.

Don't really want to go down this worm hole, but there's no such thing.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/08/01/why-non-profit-hospitals-are-so-profitable/

http://www.alternet.org/labor/not-profit-hospitals-make-billions-and-provide-little-charity-care

Sanford was named that because of the money he donated to the hospital.

There are plenty of avenues towards "personal gain". As someone previously said, this is just as likely about ego as anything else. Either way, I'm not limiting his choices strictly to those that directly line his pockets. What does seem rather clear, however, is that he has been willing in the past to donate money to the university so long as they do x, y, and z for him. When they don't, he takes his big money ball and goes home. He's more than welcome to do that, since it's his money, but the public is also more than willing to call him out on it.

Denny Sanford was nothing more than a red herring in a high stake poker game of political motivated people. It was great theater but most people are very misinformed about Denny Sanford and what took place and why.

Yeah....ok. Clearly Sanford has no agenda.

 

[Gopherprof]

I don't think t Denny has been giving money to the U to set up this one deal. I think he gives money to the U because he's wealthy and passionate about it.

So is he no longer passionate about it?

You will have to explain to me what this has to do with the public interest. How does this affect me? The Vikings stadium takes money out of my wallet.

The teaching hospital is a public interest. As Wren said (dear God I can't believe I just said that....) it belongs to the citizens of the state and should be kept independent of private interest.

You can't "assume" that maybe it wasn't a bribe. That's not an assumption. That's holding it as a possibility. You are the one doing the assuming. And even if you're right, you're naive to think this isn't the way the world works in government, business, etc.

I'm well aware that's how it often works. That's why I'm pissed. Your response seems to be to either shrug your shoulders or actively suck up to the oligarchs (you can mock the word if you want but that's exactly what they are) trying to manipulate the public interest. Honestly I can't wrap my head around people who think like that.

You are accusing him of being a purely evil quid pro quo anti public interest oligarch. So please, tell me what he got in return for his past giving?

You're actually making this way more hyperbolic than you should, as I never said anything remotely close to "evil". But you answered my question with a question, so I'm not sure what to do with that.

Oh yes. When I think of the people controlling my life, I think of a South Dakota millionaire first and foremost.

Considering they own our democratic process, you should.

It's my attempt to summarize your personal emotional response to a rich guy. I'm making some assumptions, but what's good for the goose...

You're making a ton of assumptions, and it mostly has to do with your wrong-headed attitude of what people different from you think. I've tried to explain the difference between the two lines of thought numerous times now but you either don't care, or simply can't see beyond your own obvious political bias.

 

[Section2]

So is he no longer passionate about it?


The teaching hospital is a public interest. As Wren said (dear God I can't believe I just said that....) it belongs to the citizens of the state and should be kept independent of private interest.


I'm well aware that's how it often works. That's why I'm pissed. Your response seems to be to either shrug your shoulders or actively suck up to the oligarchs (you can mock the word if you want but that's exactly what they are) trying to manipulate the public interest. Honestly I can't wrap my head around people who think like that.


You're actually making this way more hyperbolic than you should, as I never said anything remotely close to "evil". But you answered my question with a question, so I'm not sure what to do with that.


Considering they own our democratic process, you should.


You're making a ton of assumptions, and it mostly has to do with your wrong-headed attitude of what people different from you think. I've tried to explain the difference between the two lines of thought numerous times now but you either don't care, or simply can't see beyond your own obvious political bias.

I've seen all I need to see professor. You weren't by chance just teaching literature at Michigan state?

In any event, my life is certainly being controlled. But t Denny isn't reading my emails, listening to my phone calls, taking my money, regulating what I do in the privacy of my home, etc.